AHL- Apolyton Hockey League 09/10 (II): We're very perverse

[Ben Kenobi]

Yeah, you guys are +2 right now.

The Kenobimeter ranks Calgary as the 13th best team in the league.

[Asher]

Which is why you know nothing about hockey.

[Ben Kenobi]

Kenobimeter wants to rank Detroit as 8th in the West, with Calgary as 9th.

[Flubber]

10 over is not average. That's my point. Take out loser points and you get a real feeling for the class of the league.



It simply means they are unlucky and over the course of the season, we should expect them to win more and see the Canucks take their division.

Hmmm so your explanation why the Canucks are not higher in the standings is the scintillating analysis that "they are unlucky".

I should try the same analysis. hmmm in the Flames current 6 game losing streak they out-shot and out-chanced their opponents by a relatively wide margin in 4 of the games yet lost each by a single goal. Since chances and shots are highly correlated to goals i should not analyze this lack of scoring further (do the Flames lack good finishing skills? do they lack the character and heart to push hard to get the needed goal?) Instead, these things are simply unlucky and over the course of the season we should see the Flames score more.

Sorry I don't buy it

[Ben Kenobi]

Over an infinite season, there would be a perfect correlation between the two. Since their goal differential has remained steady, and their points total increased, It seems to me likely that their luck is slowly correcting itself.

[Flubber]

Hmmm

Buffal and washington have the same number of points (BUF played one fewer game) and the same number of "loser points" so that is no factor yet BUF is +26 while WASH is a +46. Thats a big difference. I guess that Buffalo is lucky and Washington unlucky and there would be no point in assessing how Ryan Miller's play has allowed Buffalo to eke out more close wins or how Washington tends to blow out teams from time to time thereby inflating their differential.

Or I guess nashville is just "lucky" too to have a slightly better ( but almost identical) record as those Canucks while Nashville has a mere +4

In fact lets look at the entire west with goal diff and points

Chi +55 72 points
SJ +42 72 points

Col +8 62
Nash +4 61
Phoe +4 61
Van +36 58
Cal +2 58
LA +10 57
Det -1 56
Dal -16 53
Ana -16 51
Minn -12 51
STL -10 49
Col -35 47
Edm -37 37

hmmm can you play "one of these teams is not like the others?" Right I remember-- they are unlucky. You don't need to remember beyond that .. You just need to recall that goal differential is the be all and end all in predicting future play and not anything to do with their past record. And god forbid that you actually look at your favorite team and see if their might be a reason for the anomaly beyond their "unluckiness"

The table demonstrates the obvious premise that goal diff will correlate strongly to wins. Only Ben would ever think anyone ever disputed that. But the Canucks numbers are weird. As I have said repeatedly, they could be a combination of a couple of things including

1. an inability to get that tying goal and thereby losing close games
2. having offensive explosiions sometimes so some wins are by wide margins
3. Being dogged on defense or in goal so that trailing 6-1 the game ends 6-3 and not 8-1

Lest look

2-0 in 6 goal margin games
0-2 in 5 goal margin games
5-0 in 4 goal margin games
9-2 in 3 goal margin games

5-8 in 2 goal margin games
7-8 in 1 goal margin games


Bottom line is that some of these characteristics are good and some are bad but a losing record in 1 and 2 goal games is not good ( I HATED all the recent Flames 1 goal losses!!!)BUt the wonder of stats-- The Canucks have a minus goal differential in close games and according to this would be something like a plus 43 in games where the margin was 3 or more. Combine that with a minus 7 in the 2 goal or less games to get plus 36. I don't say this is necessarily all bad but looking behind the stats can be very revealing.

[Flubber]

Over an infinite season, there would be a perfect correlation between the two. .

Why? I dispute that. I think there will always be teams

1. that have more flashy folks and a tendency to run up a score
2. that quit once its hopeless and allow the score to be run up
3. Teams that are defensive and win losts of close games etc etc

To argue a perfect correlation means there is no difference in teams and that is fundamentally untrue

Since their goal differential has remained steady, and their points total increased, It seems to me likely that their luck is slowly correcting itself.

Huh?? What do you mean remained steady? At the end of Oct (14 games in ) they were minus 2.

The Canucks are a good team, With Daniel back from injury I fully expect they will be very good and right from the pre-season, I saw them as a potential division winner. My assessment on that hasn't changed. BUt I have looked closely at your goal differential argument and what it has revealed to me is a team that is not winning quite enough of the close ones. They may correct that but right now, the positive part is that they have the killer instinct to put games away. The other positive is that with Daniel back they have been much stronger

[Flubber]

Chicago has more of the profile I expect in a truly elite team

15-10 in one goal games
3-3 in 2 goal games
11-2 in three goal games
3-0 in 4 goal games
1-0 in 5 goal games
1-0 in 6 goal games

This is very revealing. They never get blown out. They win many games comfortably ( but have a couple less with the biggest margins than the Canucks) AND win a comfortable majority of the close games as well.

[Flubber]

I found this process interesting so I did it for Washington as well

9-12 in one goal diff games
8-0 in 2
8-6 in 3
1-0 in 4
2-0 in 5
1-0 in 6
1-0 in 7

[notyoueither]

How about the Cormier hit on Tam?

Tam is out of the hospital.

[Asher]

I can't even watch the video. I watched it once and that was more than enough for me.

Just disgusting. The fact that it was completely premeditated is what ices it for me. At the very least, Cormier should be out the season + the playoffs and seek counselling. He came with his elbow out, right to the face.

[Sparrowhawk]

I'm thinking 8-10 games max. It was brutal I'll give you that, but the hardest part for me to watch was the guy convulsing on the ice, and I have to believe that was hard for Cormier to watch as well. I don't think anyone goes out there hoping to hit someone and leave them in convulsions on the ice.

[action=Sparrowhawk][/action]

[Ben Kenobi]

Why? I dispute that. I think there will always be teams

1. that have more flashy folks and a tendency to run up a score
2. that quit once its hopeless and allow the score to be run up
3. Teams that are defensive and win losts of close games etc etc

All I'm arguing is that in an infinite number of games, that the progression in points will correlate with the progression in goal differential. That there are discreprencies is a feature of a limited season.

To argue a perfect correlation means there is no difference in teams and that is fundamentally untrue

Hardly. Teams that are better, we would expect them to have a higher goal differential than teams that are worse.

Huh?? What do you mean remained steady? At the end of Oct (14 games in ) they were minus 2.

I mean recently, as in the last month or so, they've remained pretty steady in goal differential, and their points relative to other teams are slowly catching up. I would expect them to get a bunch of 1 and 2 goal wins over the next while.

The Canucks are a good team, With Daniel back from injury I fully expect they will be very good and right from the pre-season, I saw them as a potential division winner. My assessment on that hasn't changed. BUt I have looked closely at your goal differential argument and what it has revealed to me is a team that is not winning quite enough of the close ones. They may correct that but right now, the positive part is that they have the killer instinct to put games away. The other positive is that with Daniel back they have been much stronger

I expect that discreprency to correct itself over time. I may be entirely incorrect in my prediction, but we will see. I don't see the assertion that the Canucks ought to win their division as all that controversial.

[Asher]

I don't see the assertion that the Canucks ought to win their division as all that controversial.

You ****ing douchebag. No one said that assertion is controversial (it was a consensus pick among most fans before the season even began).

What the **** is your problem? People have a problem with your goal differential bull****, so pay ****ing attention.

[Ben Kenobi]

Hmm, I suppose I'd be remiss in pointing out how events have bourne out so far. The Canucks are just a notch below the top teams, and hopefully can catch up.

4th in goal differential, 5th in goals against, 4th in goals for.

Calgary at least has a playoff spot thanks to LA beating Detroit, and Calgary having one more win.

Who would you rather have?

27 wins, 2.27, .921 or 23 wins, 2.25, .924?